Why the Addiction to Socialism?

A recent survey claimed a shocking number of American young people preferring “socialism” almost as much as “capitalism.”  The survey apparently did not ask these young people exactly what socialism is as opposed to capitalism. Try asking middle school, high school, and even college kids what the two philosophical hemispheres mean, and you will get everything from a shrug of the shoulders to meaningless banter.

There is socialism which resembles capitalism in that the government actually sets up corporations to do its business. There is capitalism that resembles socialism to the extent that big business seeks government assistance and bailouts to help the private sector and the shareholders who are supposed to be owners of the corporations.

The truth is that when most people say they like or prefer socialism or vote for socialist candidates, they believe that they are merely asking for more government handouts at the expense of those ubiquitous and necessarily evil billionaires.

The reality is that taxing billionaires could never pay for the promises of politicians like Senator Bernie Sanders and New York Mayoral Candidate Zohran Mamdani.

When most people are asked how government is going to pay for all the promises made in the past, like Social Security and Medicaid, let alone how it will pay for all of the future promises, the usual answer is “soak the rich.” The rich are subject to varying definitions. Some people struggling to make a living think that anybody who makes more than $100,000 a year is rich. By other definitions, the rich are people who make more than a million dollars a year or a billion dollars a year. Even what it means to be rich is subject to a great deal of debate.

The United States could not possibly tax its way out of the incredible deficit which now faces the country.  Likewise, there is no way that our nation is going to cut the benefits enacted thus far, let alone promises by faux socialist candidates.

Socialism has a long and tortured history.

My own first encounter with socialism was reading Edward Bellamy’s “Looking Backward.”  This was a well-known piece of propaganda fed to people of my generation.  Bellamy envisioned a perfect world, in which people were taken care of by the largesse of others.  It was a world in which mean spirited competition took a backseat to eleemosynary characteristics.

My sister handed me George Orwell’s “Animal Farm” as an antidote to the Bellamy toxin.  Orwell essentially wrote a spoof about socialism and communism.  He envisioned a farm with a very unpleasant farmer.  The animals rebelled and took over the farm.  The pigs became the new leaders of the farm.  The establishment created by the animals turned out to be worse than the most cruel behavior of the erasable old farmer.  Orwell was thinking about the Russian Revolution and other proletariat uprisings which resulted in despots who were worse than those they replaced.

It is a surprise to many people that socialism has taken both fascist and communist forms.  Typically, socialism is thought of as “communism-lite.”  That is not necessarily the case.  The Nazis called themselves socialists because they created a society in which business was controlled by the government.  The communists frequently call themselves socialists in an effort to mislead the masses into believing that they are simply attempting to tamp down the usurpation of private initiative by an all-powerful government.

When modern socialism became the order of the day in Europe, post World War II, it did not take long for France, Spain, Italy, and the Scandinavian countries to realize that they could not afford the empty promises they made to their populations.  High inflation, low paying jobs, and failing economies taught Europe that socialism did not work as originally envisioned.  Many of those economies have moved to a private enterprise system, albeit with significant government assistance and control.

We have socialized business through tax incentives, outright grants, and a vast interwoven tapestry of government regulation.  The average business in the United States benefits by government training programs, educational subsidies, local, state and federal tax incentives, and payment by government for favored projects.  There are companies in the United States which are designated “minority” or “women owned” companies so that they can benefit from generous tax benefits.  Is that a form of socialism?

In the United States, we have nothing like pure capitalism in our nation, and most of Europe today can barely be called pure socialists.

An interesting experiment in socialism took place in Israel.  The Kibbutz system begun in the 1800s was envisioned as a perfect society where all means of production and ownership was shared by the Kibbutz community.  Many of the people who grew up in those Kibbutzim went on to become leaders of great renown.  The Kibbutz system, however, did not sustain itself long term.  The idea that the members of the Kibbutz did not have ownership in anything, not even their clothing or their children, did not last.  In time, the Kibbutz system moderated considerably and, although it is still a part of Israeli society and culture, it is a very tiny percentage.  The entire government of Israel has moved from a heavily socialized frameset to an economy where private enterprise has enabled the country to be powerful, successful, and to sustain a far more contented population.

Few people are aware of the Blooming Grove experiment.  Blooming Grove is only about 15 minutes north of Williamsport.  Early founders were Leonard Ulmer and Michael Gross.  Ulmer and Gross worked with German immigrants who were dunkards.  The families thought they had founded an idealistic, perfect community that would exist in perpetuity.  The community eventually merged into the greater neighborhood of upstate Pennsylvania, but a museum in a small white home adjacent to the cemetery testifies to the dreams and visions of the founders of this community.

Socialism is often mistaken for community efforts to work together for the betterment of all those who affiliate themselves with the community.  However, true socialism places control of the means of production in the hands of the government. Socialism provides the government dominance over individuals not only in terms of their economic viability, but also over their conduct, values, and virtues.

Unrestrained capitalism has led to the horrors of the Gilded Age in this country characterized by tyrannical treatment of workers, old and young.  Exploitation of the working population in the United States led to civil and social unrest worse than anything we have witnessed in the United States during and since the Vietnam War.  Those striking for better wages and work conditions in coal mines, clothing factories, and elsewhere were often beaten and deprived of their very basic human rights, while the government looked the other way.

The United States has essentially settled upon a mixed system where the government has a tremendous amount of power along with its partners in big business.  That partnership can be helpful or harmful.  The political parties may move the pendulum one way or another but, given the expectations of our population, the essential structure of America has and will remain unchanged.

The bottom line is whether Americans can afford their unending hunger for government benefits or whether the individual will work for their own attainment of economic wellbeing and virtue.